On 8/10/07, Heidelberg, Chris <Chris.Heidelberg@ssa.gov> wrote:
I think that the smart thing to do legally is to get signed informed consent forms and talent agreements locked down early to protect oneself for future uses both academic and public.
<snip>
study; however, I think one has to take certain steps to protect oneself legally and enable one to have the ability to publish commercially if or when the opportunity becomes available.
Chris, I don't want to be contentious on this issue, but I not only don't think that such permission is necessary, I see it as potentially harmful. First of all, to be clear, many of us doing research plan to publish it "commercially," as this remains the norm in many of our fields. Even if we do make money doing it, many of the journals do. So, from my perspective, the commercial/non-commercial division is of little importance. It could potentially become important were someone mounting a fair use defense, but I think the focus should remain on the nature of the use. I would hate to see seeking releases for web materials become the norm. Academic publishers are skittish enough, but if we continually draw the line on fair use closer and closer to the bone, there will be few fair uses left. If that happens, scholarship will be hurt. Quoting a blog as part of blog research, I feel, is a nearly ideal case of fair use defense for criticism and analysis. I certainly understand the better safe than sorry approach, but I would advice that we take the principled position that fair use is necessary for our scholarship and not embrace willingly such restrictions. - Alex -- // // This email is // [X] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. // [ ] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. // // Alexander C. Halavais // Social Architect // http://alex.halavais.net //